| Interviewer management system is built around interviews, which is for interviewer. The purpose is to ensure that the interviewer can complete high quality work, and get high-quality talent that is required by work. The validity of the interviewer’s evaluate is the inspection of the performance, which represent the quality level of the evaluation. That is to say that whether interviewer’s evaluation of candidates is proportional to his or her work. Specifically, if interviewer gave high evaluation of the candidates in the interview, and the candidate’s performance after the admission process is very good, and high degree of competence for work, namely high validity of the interviewer’s evaluation, on the contrary, if the candidate’s performance is poor, or can not do the job, it means that the interviewer’s the validity of evaluation is relatively low. Thus, the validity of evaluation is a powerful tool to evaluate the work of the interviewer, and the base of interviewer management system. In this paper, we want to build model of factors that affect the validity of evaluation in China’s civil service interview, on the basis of validity, according to the information processing theory, combined with the actual situation of China’s civil service interview, and propose management measures and institution to improve the validity of evaluation. This paper is divided into three major parts:The first part is the introduction of this article, mainly on the significance of the research background, research ideas and research methods as well as the main innovation. The part focuses on the study of previous studies on the evaluation of the examiner reviewed and summarized for examiners evaluate, the elaboration of definition in detail, and build model of factors that affect the validity of evaluation in China’s civil service interview basing on the literature analysis, combining with the status quo of China’s civil service interview. This model consists of four major elements, each also contains different factors, in particular:1) personal background factors, including demographic variables and experience; 2) cognitive factors, including cognitive style, cognitive complexity and ideal prototype; 3) Individual psychological characteristics factors, including motivation and emotion; 4) interview situational factors, including accountability, task clarity, pressures to make right decisions, job number, and time.The second part is the empirical part of this article, including the measurement of the validity of evaluation and validation of model of influencing factors. All studies in this article are in the civil service interview of Shandong Province in 2013, and the participating interviewers are the research object. In order to make the results more intuitive, we use the degree of correlation between the training results and score of interview to represent the validity of evaluation of interviewer. The results show that there is a clear difference in the degree of correlation between the selected 86 examiners, and the scope of the correlation coefficient is between -0.636 and 0.566, indicating that the differences do existing inter-individual about the validity of evaluation.In the validation of model, the model is verified, in addition to the demographic variables and work experience that proved no significant influence for the validity of evaluation, and other factors are proven that there is a significant correlation with the validity of evaluation. Specifically, we use the survey method to investigate the experience of the interviewer, and the correlation analysis and regression analysis showed there is a significant positive correlation between the experience and validity of evaluation, and the correlation coefficient was 0.256. In the same, the correlation coefficient between number of interviews and validity of evaluation was 0.493. We investigate cognitive style of interviewer with "Cognitive Style Index" (CSI), and divided it into analytical, quasi-analytical, intermediate, quasi-intuitive four types (the actual survey does not exist intuitive cognitive style). Results of ANOVA and regression analysis indicate that when the interviewer’s cognitive style is closer to the analytical his or her validity is higher, and when closer to intuitive, the validity is lower. ANOVA post hoc comparisons show that the order is quasi-intuitive, intermediate, quasi-analytical, and analytical, which represents the validity of evaluation increase in turn. With objective classification of cognitive complexity measure, the results of correlation analysis and regression analysis showed significant correlation between cognitive complexity and validity of evaluation, and the correlation coefficient was 0.552; With the method of policy capture interviewer’s weight strategy is divided into normative and non-normative policy strategies, and the result of one-way ANOVA showed a significant positive correlation between normative strategy and validity of evaluation. The result of open questionnaire study on ideal prototype for civil servant showed a close contact between the ideal prototype and weight strategies, which illustrated that the ideal prototype influenced the validity of evaluation through weight strategy.We use questionnaire for the interviewer to inspect the motivation, and correlation analysis and regression analysis showed that interviewer’s motivation had significant influence in his or her validity of evaluation, and the correlation coefficient was 0.285; In the study of emotion, we selected one interviewer with follow-up observations and comparative analysis, which compared the consistent rate(Consistent rate refers to the degree of consistency between evaluation in interview and training performance for candidates, which means when the consistent rate is higher, the validity of evaluation is higher correspondingly) between the selected one and other six interviewers in the same interview and the first and the third interview. The results showed that in the first two interviews the accuracy was higher than other interviewers in the same field, and in the third interview, and when the mood changed, his accuracy was down to the middle level compared to the first two interviews.We use questionnaires and observations to investigate accountability. The result of correlation analysis and regression analysis by questionnaire data showed there was a significant positive correlation between accountability and validity of evaluation, and the correlation coefficient was 0.273. The correlation coefficient from responsibility observation and validity of evaluation was 0.447. We use structured interview to investigate the interviewer’s task clarity and the pressure right decisions. Survey results show:The task clarity of the interviewers that had participated in the interview for the civil service for many times is higher than that of the new ones, who participated the interview for the first time; and the former is higher than the latter in the validity of evaluation also; and whether it is the first time or not to participate in the civil service interviewers, the greater the pressure to make the right decisions, the higher the validity of evaluation was; In order to analysis whether the number of position and time have impact for the validity of evaluation we use the tool of consistent rate. Analysis showed:Overall, in terms of the candidates for admission the consistent rate for excellent and good from 8 interviewers for more than one position was significantly higher than that of one position, in addition, and the rate of good in training from interview for more than one position was higher than that of one position. For the non-admission of candidates, the consistent rate for fair and poor for more than one position was significantly higher than that of one position, and there was 9 interviewers in 15 whose accuracy of evaluation at morning were significantly higher than that in the afternoon, which was account for 73.3% of the examiner’s investigation.The third part is about the improvement strategies for the validity of evaluation, including the performance evaluation system, access and training systems, and organizational management system. In the building of performance evaluation system we designed quantitative evaluation indicators and weight by AHP in order to establish a comprehensive index system; By setting up a special team for the subject of performance evaluation, taking work result recording, work behavior recording and psychological evaluation as evaluation method, assisted with recruiting candidates performance evaluation mechanisms, performance evaluation oversight mechanisms we build a sound operational performance evaluation mechanism. Finally, the mechanisms for performance improvement, accountability mechanisms, elimination mechanism and the performance evaluation results of the interviewer as part of their job evaluation composed the mechanism of performance evaluation results. The access system includes enactment of laws and regulations regarding eligibility interviewer access, expanding the selection range of interviewer, establishing standards for access, and clear admission procedures, and the talent pool for interviewer five major areas. Specifically, the selection range of interviewer should be extended to the field of professional talent assessment, to break geographical restrictions, to implement exchange of remote interviewer and positive training to increase the number of qualified interviewers; the access criteria was based on evaluate the model of the validity of evaluation and its influencing factors; the access program was refined to five specific steps; establish talent pool for interviewer, including the implementation of information dynamic management, classification management and tenure system.The training system includes principle, design and assessment of training effect three major parts. In particular, the establishment of principles includes the principle of relevance, effectiveness, autonomy flexibility; Training content which was based on the model of the validity of evaluation and its influencing factors was divided into basic training and development training; Training form included expert lectures, group discussions and simulation training; The formation of specialized team of trainers rely on developing the internal force deep and actively exploring the external forces; The construction of model of four levels of training evaluation comprise four levels:the response level, learning level, behavior level and the result level to assess the effect of training; Results of the assessment would be timely feedback to the object, including the interviewer that join in the training, training organizers and management authorities.Interview organizational management system means that the implementation of safeguards in the interview process is in order to ensure the normal functioning of validity of evaluation, including scientific design for the process of interview and emotion regulation mechanism two aspects. The former committed to scientific design of interview time and scientific combination of interviews posts under the principle of premise of fairness, empirical investigation and cost optimization; The establishment of interviewer’s emotion regulation mechanisms followed some principles, including sentiment survey before interviewer selection, moderate intensity of positive emotions, building a pilot before the establishment of mechanism; the choice of method was combined with the actual situation of civil servants and on the basis of comparison of the interview on several commonly used methods, and the main means were movie clips and music player. Three main points in time were after interview in the end of the day, before and halftime of the interview. The main interviewer and the organized sector were the subject of implementation.Finally, the main conclusions were summarized, and research directions for future research were presented against the deficiency. |
PDF Full Text Request